Resuming the personal defense speech during a quarrel (first level, no use of violence), let's take a few steps forward in the 6DKF's program introducing the concept of psychological deception.
Let's imagine that we are trying to negotiate in a straightforward and honest manner a peaceful solution to the ongoing controversy, but we have not been able to calm the mind of our potential opponent in any way.
One of the possible options is to use NLP (neuro-linguistic programming); we can in fact try to use small "mental traps" by exploiting in our favor key elements such as:
The emotional aversion to us by our interlocutor
The messages that (indirectly) his body sends us and the ones we can send him
The cerebral frequency of those who are angry (read "Deception and brain waves")
Our inner calm (unfortunately to use psychology we must have a good self-control)
Without going too far into technicalism, a banal method (but often effective with those who are not mentally shiny) is for example to impart imperative orders with the idea of getting exactly the opposite of what we ask.
What does it mean in a concrete situation? It means that if we do not want our "adversary" to approach, we can (ostentating calmness):
Say phrases like "sorry, can you go here?"
Point our finger to a precise point on the ground at the bottom-right (not in front of us but on the side, very important)
Do not give any explanations on the why of this request
Insist on repeating precisely the order (with the same calm tone and without using direct commands)
In this way:
We insinuate in the hostile interlocutor the desire to reject / oppose (eg. "No, you come here!", "No, I do not do what you tell me!"); also pointing at the bottom right with the right hand unconsciously recalls the idea of a chief who gives orders to an animal (an unacceptable perspective for those who are ready to submit us)
We insinuate in the unsure interlocutor the suspect of a trap, instigating sensations of fear / danger (eg "Why does he want me to go right there?", "What does he want me to do?")
We keep the distance, we gain precious time and at best (if we allow him a dignified exit of the scene) we obtain the aggressor to go away
In the far-away hypothesis that the aggressor will give us straight, if not else, we have him in a position chosen by us (favoring the application of more and more fighting techniques)
Although it seems easy it really is not at all, without a solid preparation on body language it is dangerous to go into these fields, we risk overlapping what we want to communicate to what we are actually communicating and thus lose control of the situation (we will deepen these themes later, this was only a digression)
Assessment of the context is fundamental, we are talking about a quarrel, not an attempted robbery, rape or other self-defense scenarios
After this short introduction to psychological deception, in the next article we will recover the past arguments seeing how to handle the people and the environment around us.